The person who signs a DMCA takedown notice is the person making its statements, including the one made under penalty of perjury. That can be the creator who owns the work, or someone the creator has authorized to act for them, such as a manager at their agency. When an agency person signs, they are the one stating, under penalty of perjury, that they are authorized to act for the owner.
What the law asks of whoever signs
U.S. copyright law lists what a takedown notice has to include "substantially" (17 U.S.C. 512(c)(3)(A)). Three of those parts are about the signer:
- The signature. The notice needs "a physical or electronic signature of a person authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed." The signer does not have to be the owner. They have to be someone the owner authorized.
- Good faith. A statement that the sender has "a good faith belief that use of the material in the manner complained of is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law."
- Accuracy and authority. A statement "that the information in the notification is accurate, and under penalty of perjury, that the complaining party is authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed."
The U.S. Copyright Office says the same thing in plain words: "If you do not wish to send the takedown notice yourself, you can authorize others to do so on your behalf, including an attorney or a takedown company."
So the question is not whether an agency may sign. It may, with the creator's authority. The question is who on your side should be making those statements for each creator.
Signing for a creator is not owning the work
When a manager signs as the creator's agent, the creator still owns the work. Signing a notice does not move ownership to the agency.
Owning the work is a separate thing. The Copyright Act says a transfer of ownership "is not valid unless an instrument of conveyance, or a note or memorandum of the transfer, is in writing and signed by the owner of the rights conveyed or such owner's duly authorized agent." If your agency believes it owns a creator's work, or holds an exclusive license to it, that should be in a writing signed by the creator before anyone names the agency as the owner in a notice.
Three ways agencies usually set this up
1. The creator signs every notice. The agency gathers the links and prepares the notices, and the creator reviews and signs each one. This keeps the sworn statements with the person who knows the work best. The cost is time: every notice waits for the creator.
2. A named person at the agency signs as the creator's authorized agent. The creator gives the agency permission to act for them, and one or more named people at the agency sign. Notices move faster, but those signers are now the ones making statements under penalty of perjury, so they need to know which works are the creator's and who the creator has licensed.
3. The agency owns the work, or holds an exclusive license, and signs as the owner. This only fits when there is a signed writing that transfers those rights. Without one, naming the agency as owner is a statement that may not be true.
Many agencies mix these. A creator who wants to see everything signs their own notices, while another prefers a manager to sign for them. What matters is that each creator's choice is written down and that the right person signs.
Before anyone at the agency signs
The law asks for authority. It does not say what form that authority must take. Get it in writing anyway, for each creator, before the first notice goes out. If a creator later disputes a notice, or someone challenges your authority, a written record is the clearest way to show the statement was true.
A short list to cover in each creator's written permission (a checklist, not a legal form):
- Which works and accounts it covers.
- Who at the agency may sign.
- Which sites or people the creator has licensed, so no notice goes to them.
- How a counter-notice reaches the creator, and how quickly.
- How the creator can end the permission.
Then, for every notice:
- Open each link. Confirm it is the creator's work and not something the creator licensed.
- Think about fair use. In Lenz v. Universal Music Corp., 815 F.3d 1145 (9th Cir. 2016), the court held that "a copyright holder must consider the existence of fair use before sending a takedown notification under § 512(c)." That ruling binds only courts in the Ninth Circuit, which covers California and other western states, but it is a good habit everywhere. A full repost of a paid set is one thing. A review or news story that uses a small part is another.
- Remember who is liable. Section 512(f) says "any person who knowingly materially misrepresents" that material is infringing can be liable for damages, "including costs and attorneys' fees." It says any person, so it can reach an agency signer as well as a creator.
Who hears about a counter-notice
If the person who posted the copy sends a counter-notice, the site sends a copy to "the person who provided the notification." If your agency's signer sent the notice, that is your agency, not the creator. Forward it to the creator the same day.
The clock is short. The site may put the material back "not less than 10, nor more than 14, business days" after it receives the counter-notice, unless its designated agent first receives notice from "the person who submitted the notification" that "such person has filed an action seeking a court order to restrain" the poster. The right to sue generally belongs to "the legal or beneficial owner of an exclusive right," which usually means the creator, not the agency. For a U.S. work that usually needs a copyright registration first. The statute speaks of the person who sent the notice filing that action, so how the site is told about the creator's case is a question for the creator's lawyer. That is one more reason the creator should hear about a counter-notice quickly and talk to a lawyer. Our guide on what a counter-notice means and what happens next walks through the timeline.
Check each site's own rules too
The law sets the minimum. Each site can add its own process, and some say outright that agents may file. Telegram, for example, says copyright requests "should only be submitted by the copyright owner or an agent authorized to act on the owner's behalf." Read the site's own copyright page before you send, because forms and wording change.
For the parts every notice needs, see our guide on how to send a DMCA takedown notice, which includes a template.
A quick way to decide
- Does the creator want to see and sign every notice? Then the creator signs.
- Does the creator want the agency to handle it, and has the creator said so in writing? Then a named person at the agency signs as the creator's authorized agent.
- Does the agency hold a signed transfer or exclusive license? Only then does the agency sign as the owner.
- In every case: open each link, think about fair use, and route counter-notices to the creator the same day.
Where LeakVoid fits
LeakVoid takes care of the paperwork for creators who'd rather not do it themselves. The LeakVoid plan searches the sites we cover for copies of your work posted without permission and prepares the takedown notices. Once you authorize us at signup, we sign and send your notices for you. Anything that may be fair use waits for you to decide.
The LeakVoid plan is $17.99 a month, about 60 cents a day. Cancel online anytime. It's available in the US only.
Latest-month refund guarantee. See terms
Nobody can promise removal, and LeakVoid doesn't give legal advice. Want the details first? Read how LeakVoid works, see pricing, or try the free link check. Ready now? Create your LeakVoid account. You can also browse all our guides.
Free DMCA notice generator (you send it yourself)
Want to know how a site takes notices? Email hello@leakvoid.com with the site's name, and we'll tell you whether it takes them by email, only through its own web form, or through no public channel we could find.
Sources
All checked Sun 2026-10-25.
- 1. 17 U.S.C. 512, United States Code, 2024 Edition, U.S. Government Publishing Office (subsections (c)(3)(A), (f), (g)): https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2024-title17/html/USCODE-2024-title17-chap5-sec512.htm
- 2. U.S. Copyright Office, "Section 512 of Title 17": https://www.copyright.gov/512/
- 3. 17 U.S.C. 204, United States Code, 2024 Edition (transfers in a signed writing): https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2024-title17/html/USCODE-2024-title17-chap2-sec204.htm
- 4. 17 U.S.C. 501, United States Code, 2024 Edition (who may sue): https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2024-title17/html/USCODE-2024-title17-chap5-sec501.htm
- 5. Lenz v. Universal Music Corp., 815 F.3d 1145 (9th Cir. 2016), Nos. 13-16106 and 13-16107 (9th Cir.), amended opinion filed March 17, 2016: https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2016/03/17/13-16106.pdf
- 6. Telegram, "FAQ": https://telegram.org/faq
How this page is made
This guide's facts were checked against the sources listed above as of the "Last reviewed" date at the top of the page, and those sources may have changed since. This is a check against sources, not a legal review. It has no person byline. Our editorial policy explains how guides are made, sourced, checked and corrected. If you see a mistake, write to hello@leakvoid.com.